On 25 Dec 2005 11:52:48 -0800, "Gyan" <letterzone@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Yes, the performance of a processor with HT often increases drastically
>if a software has been optimized for it, i.e., if it has been designed
>to work on multiple threads. And if it has not been optimized for HT,
>disabling HT will probably give better performance.


NO, it has nothing to do with HT.

A Pentium 4 is not faster at the tasks you listed with a LOT
of software. There is no HT or other feature you can enable
or disable that will change this, it will simply be slower
than an Athlon64, and even an Athlon XP, or a Pentium-M in
some applications.

The issue is not how you configure the P4. It is what
SPECIFIC software title and version you run.

I suggest that you do not have a good overview of what aids
performance. For your described tasks it would be
beneficial to have over 512MB of memory for example.
I'm not going to argue about this stuff, but to give you a
hint: One of my systems is 18 months old, is faster than
what you're going to build today and cost less then, than
yours will now.

Including keyboard, mouse, UPS, cabinet, and SMPS with other items I
have mentioned already, this system will cost about 850$.

I shall add another drive later if I feel the need--don't forget, this
is a low-budget PC with huge hidden possibilities.

I shall try to find out how I can use this processor in the best way.
Besides, the board has four memory slots. I shall upgrade the memory
later.

Please let me know whether it is worth buying a cabinet with the option
of adding a second exhaust fan, i.e. a fan other than that in the SMPS?

On 25 Dec 2005 20:25:29 -0800, "Gyan" <letterzone@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>I shall try to find out how I can use this processor in the best way.
>Besides, the board has four memory slots. I shall upgrade the memory
>later.
>
>Please let me know whether it is worth buying a cabinet with the option
>of adding a second exhaust fan, i.e. a fan other than that in the SMPS?


It's not just "worth buying" it is absolutely essential for
proper cooling of the system unless you had a power supply
with a very loud, high RPM fan, and even then it is still
sub-optimal to remove all the heat through the power supply.

Given all these questions, I'm starting to think you would
be well off to consider a Dell. You mentioned $850- for
less than that you could get an equivalent system in a bare
form and if you then need to buy more memory or the video
card, etc, you'd still have $ left over to do so.
Essentially, buying separates of the Intel board and P4 you
are paying a premium, this build will end up being fairly
costly for the resultant performance level.

Thanks; I shall order an additional fan.

My system, which includes a flat 17" monitor, Sony double layer DVD
Burner (DRU 800A), Intel P4 3 GHZ (630 no.), Intel D945GNTL
motherboard, 2 X Kingston 667 FSB 256 MB RAM, Seagate 160 GB SATA HDD,
Cabinet, SMPS, keyboard, mouse, and UPS, will cost me 850 $; whereas, a
Dell system of the above configuration will cost about 1050$, as the
calculations show on the Dell Web site. In addition, I know the
manufacturer of only one item from the Dell system: the processor.

On 26 Dec 2005 04:10:35 -0800, "Gyan" <letterzone@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Thanks; I shall order an additional fan.
>
>My system, which includes a flat 17" monitor, Sony double layer DVD
>Burner (DRU 800A), Intel P4 3 GHZ (630 no.), Intel D945GNTL
>motherboard, 2 X Kingston 667 FSB 256 MB RAM, Seagate 160 GB SATA HDD,
>Cabinet, SMPS, keyboard, mouse, and UPS, will cost me 850 $; whereas, a
>Dell system of the above configuration will cost about 1050$, as the
>calculations show on the Dell Web site. In addition, I know the
>manufacturer of only one item from the Dell system: the processor.


You don't just go to the Dell 'site and start adding or
subtracting parts to get what you wanted (for the best
deal). Instead you'd keep an eye out for Dell promotions,
coupons, etc, on deal-'sites to find the lowest bare system
config. Then having that price, determine if changing the
Dell base system is cost-effective, or if it would be more
cost effective to add your own parts as I'd mentioned
previously, memory and video for example.

You don't know the manufacturer now, either. Intel doesn't
"make" motherboards, they contract that out. Asus had made
some but they switched to a lower-cost manufacturer, IIRC,
it might've been Fujitsu-Seimens. Point being, if you buy a
so-called "cost effective" Intel board rather than a
higher-end board, you will find there's the same difference
with intel boards as many others- you're getting what you
pay for, except with intel as the middleman there's an
additional markup from Intel as well as the distributer and
seller instead of one fewer middleman.